GOLDSIGN

Rated: Not good enough

price:
$$$$

location: United States

GOLDSIGN is not taking adequate steps to eliminate hazardous chemicals in its supply chain.

GOLDSIGN sustainability rating

Planet

2 out of 5

People

1 out of 5

Animals

3 out of 5

Overall rating: Not good enough

Our ratings are based on a scale from 1 (We avoid) to 5 (Great) How we rate


GOLDSIGN is owned by Citizens of Humanity.

Our “Planet” rating evaluates brands based on the environmental policies in their supply chains, from carbon emissions and wastewater to business models and product circularity. Here we rate GOLDSIGN “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

  • It uses some lower-impact materials including organic cotton.
  • There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce its climate impacts.
  • There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
  • There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.

Workers’ rights are central to our “People” rating, which assess brands’ policies and practices on everything from child labour to living wages and gender equality. Here we rate GOLDSIGN “Very Poor”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

  • It partly traces its supply chain.
  • There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
  • There’s no evidence it implements practices to support diversity and inclusion in its direct operations or supply chain.
  • There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
  • During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not disclose adequate policies or safeguards to protect workers in its supply chain from the virus.

Brands’ animal welfare policies and, where applicable, how well they trace their animal-derived products are the focus of our “Animals” rating. Here we rate GOLDSIGN “It’s a Start”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

  • There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.
  • It appears to use wool, and shearling.
  • It uses some recycled leather in its leather products.
  • It doesn’t appear to use down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.
  • There’s no evidence it traces any animal-derived materials to the first production stage.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate GOLDSIGN “Not Good Enough” overall.

Last updated February 2024